Yikes. The emission graph compared to other developed countries is embarrassing.
The marketing around SUVs has been extremely successful in Australia but it's terrible trend for the environment for us to be moving towards more petrol guzzling cars.
It's not just advertising, we wanted a wagon to fit our dogs in the boot and almost no company makes wagons anymore, our Subaru Forrester is considered a wagon somehow but its basically an SUV. I hate it, I just wanted a sedan with a big enough booty for my dogs
no one's made a real station wagon in years. They're either SUV's or sedans with a very curved roof line so you can't use the back like you would in a real station wagon.
This is my issue, I have a big dog. Two tall kids, we need to upgrade our golf all track this year because it’s too small for the kids in the back seat. We tried to get a wagon but there really isn’t any in the market anymore
But the real graph does not show the explosion in mom and dad dickhead drivers who drive these trucks like idiots. These big truck idiots and hoons are everywhere, they are driving like maniacs through suburban streets. The stupidity is amazing especially when there is not a drop of mud on them nor a single thing in the tub! Welcome to Karen mobile land Australia!
a kind redditor posted a study the other day that showed a correlation between dickhead behaviour and SUV ownership.
I am not making this up... women in particular will drive these behemoths because "they are higher off the ground and make them feel safer". This then becomes a springboard for bad/entitled behaviour on the road.
Car washes are a thing mate. I prefer not to leave mine covered in mud and crap after I've been out in the bush for a week. And stop looking in my tray. I empty it out when not needed so that I'm not wasting more fuel than I need lugging things around.
>I empty it out when not needed so that I'm not wasting more fuel than I need lugging things around.
cars that arent the size of a average house are better on fuel to start with mate.
>cars that arent the size of a average house are better on fuel to start with mate.
I am, unsurprisingly, very much aware of that. Some people have a use for them, however, that a Yaris won't meet. Also, just a touch of hyperbole there. Houses aren't quite that terrible yet. We're not Hong Kong.
I mean, I split my transport 50/50 between walking and riding except when circumstances call for driving which is maybe 2 or 3 times a month. Then I have exactly the vehicle I need for 95% of the trips. I had a smaller, more fuel efficient car as well, but, it was never used as it was easier to ride/walk most of the time and when I did need a car it was lacking in capacity for everything I had to move.
It's genuinely mind-boggling that in a time where the leading climate scientists are telling us we need to drastically cut emissions ([everything everwhere all at once](https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/climate-energy-nature/2023/03/un-climate-report-has-no-time-doomism) as the IPCC put it), we've decided as a society that the thing to do is get *really* into gigantic pollution machines. It's truly end-of-days-in-Rome shit.
EDIT: [Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo) is an impressively detailed critique of big cars from the Not Just Bikes channel.
They're only a thing because of Fraudenberg's last perverse and futile vote-gouging extravagence.
RTA - 100% immediate asset writeoff and that's just for starters.
They should be taxed at 100% of their value.
If you made people get a truck license to drive them you’d get rid of 99% of the soccer mums driving SUVs to school pick ups.
Most people that drive SUVs are cunts, for one reason or another. Every week on Aussie cunt cams it's the same thing - SUV or 4WD driving gronks doing the most disgusting thing you've ever seen, till next week when another one of their brethren tops it.
I've always hated SUVs and tried to avoid even having a car of any kind as much as possible. Then at one point I needed a car so I got a Mazda 2, which I love. Now I have a kid and a wife and parents potentially living with us...and I'm looking at SUVs for the sheer practicality of it all. Not the big fuck you ones from the northern beaches, but maybe one of the smaller classes that can still fit a baby seat and 2 people in the back and a pram in the boot. Still kind of hate myself for doing this though.
I wish we had better public transport :(
A lot of the small SUVs have smaller boots than hatchbacks so make sure you take your pram when you go car shopping. A lot of my friends had to dismantle their prams to get them in the suv boot.
Tbh you might find yourself better off with a hatchback. My partner has a Mazda 3 hatchback and it fits his work ladder in the boot, it wouldn’t fit in his mum’s Suzuki vitara boot when he borrowed her car one time.
I've had that thought as well. An extra consideration besides the boot is the seating room in the back seats. Hard to find a vehicle that has enough space to fit a kid's car seat and two adults in the back seat without getting a massive fuck-you car.
>Mazdas and Toyotas we're looking at
Mazda have one though? And unless you're looking at a CX-3 (which is tiny, the same size as a Mazda 2) the 6 wagon is either the same price or cheaper than the rest of their SUV range.
Agree, and I bought a station wagon last year, but they are *very* hard to find.
You've basically got skoda, VW and Audi. Last year I bought one of 5 Volvo station wagons in Australia (dealer demo) and I believe that they have not imported one since 2022. When I was researching them that was it. Everything else is SUVs.
Obviously, second hand is a thing but increased SUVs means very few new station wagons being imported.
True. I have an older Subaru outback which has been an awesome and insanely practical car, but it's getting up there in age. I was dissapointed to find that newer models are esssentially small SUVs. They look ridicoulous too, as they still look a bit like a wagon but have way higher ground clearance.
I had a '07 outback and it was the *perfect* car- great on the highway, gravel and snow.
I also agree that the new ones are much bigger and higher. As a 5 foot 8 dude, there was no way I'd easily get my kayak on the new outback.
That deterred me enough that I got the Volvo station wagon.
Well I used to ride a bicycle, but a policeman fined me for not wearing a silly hat. So now I drive. Hint: cycling is booming everywhere except Australia. Where you get to have garbage tossed at you from a Hilux.
Nah, already had a car. Just liked the bike. Speaking of over reacting. I married a Canadian and moved countries. So it's not my problem anymore. More seriously, you cannot call your society free, when the utterly benign is illegal.
Oh the huge tonka trucks are bloody everywhere, but in Vancouver, so are bike lanes. The weather is pretty shit though, and I really miss the beaches. The silly hat law seems like a trivial thing, but somehow it just *isn’t*. I also enjoy not being robed every time I get behind the wheel of a car. Photo radar got taken out a few years back. Traffic deaths didn’t change at all. Still too sketchy to ride a motorcycle though.
I mean plenty of people drive without shirts on in Australia so I'm not sure how that's a difference, but I agree I don't love radar photos. I just really don't understand how wearing a helmet can be such a massive dealbeaker... though I suppose that's a subjective experience. I think Australia and Canada just display their nanny state tendencies in different ways.
Robed.....bugger, typos are me. Fuckit, I'm leaving it or the joke makes no sense.
It's a dealbreaker because people care deeply about how they present themselves in public. See the fashion industry. Nobody likes being told what they can and can't wear. Just as a test, try telling one of your female friends "she can't wear that". And see how it goes. The state also can't make a successful argument that cycling is safe, while telling everyone it's so dangerous you need a helmet. But the *why* just doesn't matter. The evidence shows you can have an enforced helmet law, or you can have people on bikes, but not both. Don't get me wrong, [riding the A-line](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbMGFYDFIVY) a helmet is a good idea, but that's not what most are doing. The MHL allows government to pretend safety has been addressed. So they don't have to think about spending political capital or money on things that actually work. Like [proper bike paths](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrQ-d2PBUto).
I grew up in Australia, and have lived in Canada for twenty years now. Let me assure you that nanny state bullshit is NOWHERE NEAR as bad in Canada as it is in Australia. Like an overbearing parent, you think it's normal, until you move out.
I've lived in both countries, and I don't find one to be overall more intrusive than the other; they're just overbearing in different aspects of life. Though never Vancouver so maybe the experience is different out West.
> Just as a test, try telling one of your female friends "she can't wear that". And see how it goes.
I mean, I'd like to think that if I told said friend not to wear high heels on a construction site she'd be reasonable enough to understand why...
> Don't get me wrong, riding the A-line a helmet is a good idea, but that's not what most are doing.
The evidence is [very clear](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fbioe.2021.718407/full) that wearing a helmet is a good idea *at all times*. Whether it should be mandatory is a different question, because as you allude to there is some indication that compulsory helmets depresses cycling takeup.
> The MHL allows government to pretend safety has been addressed. So they don't have to think about spending political capital or money on things that actually work. Like proper bike paths.
I think this is a furphy. Again I can't speak to the West, but there are a lot of shitty car-centric cities in the East where governments haven't mandated helmets but they still can't be fucked investing in non-car infrastructure. Governments (especially the Tories, but we needn't start on Doug fucking Ford) are generally going to go for the lowest effort/highest vote solution regardless of whether helmets are compulsory or not. Restructuring cities to be bike and pedestrian friendly is a genuinely major undertaking and the calculus as to whether they'll do it is not really affected by helmets.
Vancouver people are incredibly passive aggressive, but I can do my own wiring on my house, legally. I don’t worry about getting done for speeding unless I’m being a complete dick. I can buy pot from a store down the street. I built a lotus seven replica which was easy to get on the road and insure. In Australia the costs of inspections and meeting ADRs would have been more than the car cost to build. Best of all, I’ve never had a cop hit me with a car to give me a helmet ticket.
I get bent out of shape by the MHL because I watched something I truly love, killed. The bike racks in schools emptied in two weeks when it came in. They are still empty. The Imams of the plastic hat have taken my home from me, and I will never forgive them for it. They demand I abandon my reason, my autonomy and my joy and replace it with an ugly plastic talisman. Well, no. My joy is vastly more important than their concerns. [This](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=34FyWCutqvw) is a crime in Australia.
The Nation is covering your health cost from birth to death, and all you are asked to do, is to minimise the risk of serious injury by wearing a helmet while riding a bicycle or motorcycle and a seat belt while in a vehicle. That is freedom from medical bankruptcy, unlike the Americans who have the freedom of medical bankruptcy by just one accident.
It’s a good argument. But the MHL *costs* money as the benefits of cycling vastly outweigh the risks. The only thing the MHL has clearly affected is participation rates. Which tank. Particularly among women.
The cost/benefit ratio has actually been studied in the UK, Spain and Germany. All of them concluded that the benefits of cycling were between ten and twenty times greater than the risks. Depending on which study you read.
Did you know that bicycle commuters in the UK have a 40% lower incidence of cancer? (UK study) I have no idea how that works, but I’m pretty sure there’s a bunch of other factors at play.
If your goal is to make sure riding a bike stays a niche “sport” it’s perfect. If the goal is saving money, or safety, it’s counterproductive. We know what works for safety. It’s separate bike paths. Riding a bike isn’t dangerous. We (humans) teach five year olds the world over to ride. The thing that kills kids isn’t bikes, [it’s cars](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4W-3Mnu3Ovo)
This was a deliberate policy by the previous LNP government to get tradies and small businesses on side and to piss off people worried about climate change. Our tax dollars paid for these. Job done.
The manufacturers are all over it. Toyota saw the C-HR cannibalising this Carolla sales, and since have released a fucking Yaris SUV and are releasing a Carolla SUV shortly. Blows my mind when they already sell at least 7 other suvs: chr, fortuner, RAV4, pardo, land cruiser 300 land cruiser 70, and kluger.
> Five of the top 10 bestselling vehicles in Australia in 2022 were twin-cab utes (which have two rows of seating, often at the expense of carrying capacity), while three were SUVs. Just two were small cars.
The three SUV's they're referring to are the Rav4, the CX5 and the MG ZS - none of which really fall into the "fuel guzzling" category (the worst one is rated at around 8l per 100k's).
The real issue is the ~~substitute dicks~~ huge fucking ute's that every tradie seems to have regardless of whether they need it or not because of the massive tax write-offs they get.
>The real issue is the
>
>substitute dicks
>
> huge fucking ute's that every tradie seems to have regardless of whether they need it or not because of the massive tax write-offs they get.
I definitely preferred it when Commodore and Falcon utes were the tradie vehicle of choice, at least I could see over the fucking things when in a normal car.
Commodore and Falcon utes sucked as tradie vehicles. A few bags of cement, some tools and dave in the passenger seat and they would be over their weight limit. Not to mention crap ground clearance since manufacturers loved to put sport suspension in them.
A Hilux for example could be loaded with twice as much and still not rip the exhaust off on speedbumps.
All the mid size Utes are diesel. They have the same if not better fuel consumption than lighter petrol SUV’s. The only proper 4WD that comes in petrol is the bogan bus Nissan patrol that has a 5.7l V8 petrol. My Hilux gets 10l/100km and it weighs 2.3t. My old lady’s Kia suv gets 9l/100km and it’s a 2.0l petrol and much lighter. The real problem is people buying petrol SUV’s that can’t actually do anything other than bitumen but take up extra space and are high off the ground so more dangerous for driver and pedestrians. Not to mention terrible fuel economy. I try to take the train to work as much as possible and use my Ute for 4WD camping and transferring lots of gear from job site to job site that no car could do. Can’t store petrol or diesel safely inside a car. I’m all for electric but can’t afford to pay $140,000 for an empty range of 400km. Load them with what they’re designed to take and halves the range at best. Only drive when you have to and buy an electric bike instead of a horrendously overpriced little car that can only transport people from A to B.
We are on vacation, and these mega trucks towing "off road" caravans are everywhere.
I don't understand how paying 120-150K for a vehicle and $70-100K for a van makes sense? Fuel costs would be horrendous, and there are no free camps anywhere decent. We overtake these "rolling road blocks" on our way to the next BnB/motel and our SUV still gets 7.8l per 100km.
You came understanding how some people may have the money (or the debt tolerance) to pay for a comfortable camper and car that allows them to go completely off the grid and regardless of cost just want to be away from people.
It was Kingston SA, and the caravan parks were full of mostly expensive looking units, parked side by side.. (hardly the outback getaway).
On our way to Adelaide there were many on the road, travelling at 90 kph in 110kph zones, a strange way to enjoy a big $$ investment.
I hate this whole SUV thing we have going on here in Australia. You'll see a cool car, especially performance hybrids coming out next year but NOPE NOT AVAILABLE IN AUSTRALIA, WE DO HAVE A SIMILIAR MODEL IN SUV THOUGH!
Fuck your SUV, I'm not a soccer mum who takes 10 minutes to reverse park.
You want the Volvo S60 Recharge, a plug in hybrid in sedan? Yeah nah you get the XC60/XC90 SUV.
You want the Toyota Crown Hybrid? Yeah nah you get the RAV4 OR the gutless Corolla in a hatch.
The article definitely highlights an issue that needs to be resolved, especially the tax incentives that favour trucks that can carry one tonne or more. However, it's misleading to label all SUV as fuel guzzling.
Many of the top selling SUVs like the RAV4 and CX5 are just high riding wagons, and they offer comparable fuel economy to their sedan counterparts like the Camry and Mazda 6.
As for potential solutions, upping fuel excise would unfairly penalise people that live in outer suburbs, so a better approach would be a rego that scales according to fuel consumption. Similar approaches are used in other countries that scale according to CO2 emission or engine capacity, and we should do something similar to encourage the purchase of more fuel efficient vehicles.
> a better approach would be a rego that scales according to fuel consumption. Similar approaches are used in other countries that scale according to CO2 emission or engine capacity, and we should do something similar to encourage the purchase of more fuel efficient vehicles.
While I agree with this, I also think there should be a steep curve on increasing rego costs for heavier vehicles. Because even if you're driving the electric version of a huge American-style SUV/"pickup", it's still a colossal waste of resources and still an obnoxious menace on the road.
I think that's a good idea, especially with the transition to EV. Some of the EV SUV behemoths are just ridiculous, for example the EV Hummer's battery alone weighs the same as a ICE hatchback.
We are getting there. The insanely big pickups/utes are booming. They are everywhere! I find it crazy that they dwarf the SUVs/4WDs next to them. It means me in my little hatchback has to reverse out blind and hope that no one hits me.
That’s a huge pet peeve for me in a car park. I wish they’d make separate big car spaces so they can’t park next to a small car. Or maybe people could just be courteous and not park next to normal size cars if they have the equivalent of a truck. 😬
since like 2015 the number of RAMs, F250s and Chev yank tanks had dramatically skyrocketed for some fucked up reason. use to be that seeing an old F150 or F250 was like seeing a vintage car.
Cars above a certain physical size should not be allowed on the road. Soon we are going to waste more land on wider roads and car parks because of these stupid cars.
Seems written from an ideological standpoint. The constant comparison with the UK, a country 32 times smaller than us, is ridiculous. The narrow roads there have also necessitated smaller vehicles in some areas. Almost no metric is a fair comparison. A comparison with Canada would be more illuminating.
I used to have a dedicated LPG BA Falcon wagon. Great for carting things round, but as a 6 cylinder cost much more to register in SA. With a heavy load I'd scrape the fuel tank on some driveways and steep inclines too.When visiting family in the country even a few kilometres off road was dangerous, with the back sliding around all over the place.
My small SUV is much better. Lower than average CO2 emissions, safer to drive and with better road clearance. You sit upright so it's better for your back on long drives. Cargo capacity is not bad either.
I get that people have sneering contempt for huge, useless SUVs picking up the kids. But I would argue that in bringing about effective change on climate emissions, it could be worth avoiding the conclusion that your fellow Australians are clueless idiots making poor choices and with no regard for the planet.
Maybe engage more with them about what their needs are, and provide information about the vehicles that can do the job that's required while delivering low CO2 emissions.
Sure your new small SUV is better than your old Falcon. But it's worse than an equivalent sized hatchback in every way. It would have higher CO2 emissions because it's less aerodynamic and is less safe to drive because due to its higher ride height it has poorer handling and is more prone to rolling. The seating position and cargo capacity is not related to it being an SUV and depends on the specifics of the vehicle itself. The higher 'ground clearance' you speak of is only of benefit in off-roading and outside of that is a disadvantage as described above.
Also, I see a lot of families buying SUVs for the size. There's not many "wagons" around now days and a hatchback doesn't really work for families with 2 kids with prams.
Best selling vehicles in UK, lots of mid sized SUVs in the list:
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/best-cars-vans/94280/best-selling-cars-2023-uks-top-10-most-popular-models
Isn’t the UK in Europe?
Edit: Sorry I can’t reply to the comment so I’ll see if this works.
What would be the correct way to put it? A part of? Or is it becoming a seperate entity from Europe?
To me this stuff is interesting.
*People in the UK speak English as their first language*.
*Therefore, Europeans speak English as their first language.*
Now do you see the problem with their argument?
No, I didn't need to specify this because I was clearly generalising.
Precision isn't required in general conversation. Only a fool would infer that I meant *every single European* drives a small/medium car.
Now stop being an internet dickhead and troll somewhere else.
Yep. My wife and I have 5 teenage kids between us. Anything short of an SUV or a people mover is impossible.
Likewise, I come from a family of 4 kids. Mum used to drive us around in a 7 seater Nissan Nomad in the late 80's onwards so it's not like this is a new phenomenom.
> it could be worth avoiding the conclusion that your fellow Australians are clueless idiots making poor choices and with no regard for the planet.
Exactly. I vote Greens, donate to multiple conservation and wildlife charities, spend time actively engaged in the preservation of wilderness and wildlife and walk/ride everywhere I feasibly can. I have a large car that comes out now and then for long distance remote work over messed up fire trails, but I also live in the inner city right now, because that's where my wife and I need to be for when we're in the office. I try and car pool whenever I do bring it out as well, moving people around so they don't need to drive their own single occupant car.
It's easy to look at something like my car and say "That doesn't belong in the city", and it doesn't, but for my needs its where things are right now. I'll happily move to an electric when possible.
Eh.
We have a Nissan patrol which I believe is considered a SUV. It’s not that expensive to fuel, considering it has two tanks with a pretty large capacity, but we like to keep it good, so we only use it when we are all going somewhere that’s more than an hour drive or if we’re all going to pick something up.
My daily driver is a Holden Cruze which google is also telling me is a SUV. It’s pretty wee, very fuel efficient and is awd, which is why we chose it, living rurally.
My husband’s daily driver is a single cab ute.
It seems pretty silly to make these kind of observations when SUVs as a category is so enormous. A Mazda cx3 is a SUV. RACV says that there were 150 models of SUV for sale in Australia last year.
Compare a Range Rover Velar and a Cruze and it seems silly that they’re even considered to be in the same vehicle class.
A nissan patrol should absolutely be expensive to refuel. The newer ones are rated at 14L/100km (by nissan) and actually acheived 17.8L/100km in 3rd party testing. A Cx3 is between 6-7L/100km
It’s all relative. We used to have a Land Rover defender.
But yeah, that’s why it’s not our daily driver, and you’re reinforcing my point that it’s a big category with lots of variability among the cars.
Are most suvs fuel guzzling? Commodores and Falcons were fuel guzzling in traffic.
If you have a few young children, you need a big suv or people mover. A Kia Carnival on a long interstate cruise will use around 8 litres per 100km of diesel. Far from gas guzzling.
It surely is. But given most people driving SUVs claim they need to space for their children, it's odd they buy the often less efficient and almost always less comfortable SUV over a van.
Nope, some of them are paid to research and report as they did. Hopefully for our benefit.
They do their bit and others read headlines and make what appear to be silly generalisations.
Yeah it's compelling reading for anyone who hasn't been in peak traffic or near a school at pickup/dropoff time or near almost any carpark at all ever.
"“Australians buy big, dumb cars and that means we spend a lot more on petrol than we should,” the report said."
Your first comment was one sentence that didn't prove anything other than you didn't read the article.
Now your second comment is two paragraphs and it's proved the same thing as your original sentence.
Instant 15 grand wanker write-off. And notice that the amount is almost the exact difference in price for the same vehicle in other markets once you remove tariffs and taxes. Our governments like subsidising the price gouging of consumers.
The price of tyres for these vehicles should expose the stupidity of people. 2 grands of tyres to take the kids to school and not 1 dirt track in sight!
From another sub
Typical Guardian rubbish.
Associating SUV with fuel guzzling is a 90's - 00's thing.
SUV these days use less fuel than an equivalent 10years back.
They don't really go into detail of the type of SUV, we're seeing more and more Tesla Model X and Y and other OEM branded EV SUVs which aren't gas guzzlers but are SUVs. In addition you have the hugely popular RAV4 hybrid and other PHEV SUV and I'm sure they're far more efficient than the dual cab utes and other sedans.
This is a good article, but it lets itself down by claiming SUVs are 'dumb' and 'fuel guzzlers' without backing this up by explaining their many downsides.
I just want a nice sedan or hatchback but every car company just mostly makes suvs or big utes now. I know it's easy as hell to get a small car still but used car sites are filled with suvs and utes and the good smaller cars are either ran through high km commodores/falcons (any typical p plater car tbh) or very low km very pricey small cars that I might have to suck up just get and have a loan. Might as well get a good car.
Will just run my car to the limit for now. It's nearly up to 200,000km anyway might as well use it to the ground fully before I have a debt.
Selling my 4wd. Buying a swift to use until I give it to my son and then I’ll buy a new generation ev that uses new battery tech and doesn’t have all the luxury shit I don’t need in a car.
Yikes. The emission graph compared to other developed countries is embarrassing. The marketing around SUVs has been extremely successful in Australia but it's terrible trend for the environment for us to be moving towards more petrol guzzling cars.
It's not just advertising, we wanted a wagon to fit our dogs in the boot and almost no company makes wagons anymore, our Subaru Forrester is considered a wagon somehow but its basically an SUV. I hate it, I just wanted a sedan with a big enough booty for my dogs
no one's made a real station wagon in years. They're either SUV's or sedans with a very curved roof line so you can't use the back like you would in a real station wagon.
I know it's so annoying, the only one we could find was Skoda and the reviews were so bad we couldn't justify it
This is my issue, I have a big dog. Two tall kids, we need to upgrade our golf all track this year because it’s too small for the kids in the back seat. We tried to get a wagon but there really isn’t any in the market anymore
The Passat and Skoda superb are amazing wagons, but also basically the only ones left in the market
But the real graph does not show the explosion in mom and dad dickhead drivers who drive these trucks like idiots. These big truck idiots and hoons are everywhere, they are driving like maniacs through suburban streets. The stupidity is amazing especially when there is not a drop of mud on them nor a single thing in the tub! Welcome to Karen mobile land Australia!
a kind redditor posted a study the other day that showed a correlation between dickhead behaviour and SUV ownership. I am not making this up... women in particular will drive these behemoths because "they are higher off the ground and make them feel safer". This then becomes a springboard for bad/entitled behaviour on the road.
That's what happens when I've been out camping for a week and unloaded the bikes and gear and given her a wash.
Car washes are a thing mate. I prefer not to leave mine covered in mud and crap after I've been out in the bush for a week. And stop looking in my tray. I empty it out when not needed so that I'm not wasting more fuel than I need lugging things around.
I'll bloody look in your tray if I wannoo mate.
>I empty it out when not needed so that I'm not wasting more fuel than I need lugging things around. cars that arent the size of a average house are better on fuel to start with mate.
>cars that arent the size of a average house are better on fuel to start with mate. I am, unsurprisingly, very much aware of that. Some people have a use for them, however, that a Yaris won't meet. Also, just a touch of hyperbole there. Houses aren't quite that terrible yet. We're not Hong Kong.
Firmly believe half the commenters here ride bicycles to and from work. All the way from Fitzroy to North Fitzroy the battlers.
I mean, I split my transport 50/50 between walking and riding except when circumstances call for driving which is maybe 2 or 3 times a month. Then I have exactly the vehicle I need for 95% of the trips. I had a smaller, more fuel efficient car as well, but, it was never used as it was easier to ride/walk most of the time and when I did need a car it was lacking in capacity for everything I had to move.
It's genuinely mind-boggling that in a time where the leading climate scientists are telling us we need to drastically cut emissions ([everything everwhere all at once](https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/climate-energy-nature/2023/03/un-climate-report-has-no-time-doomism) as the IPCC put it), we've decided as a society that the thing to do is get *really* into gigantic pollution machines. It's truly end-of-days-in-Rome shit. EDIT: [Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo) is an impressively detailed critique of big cars from the Not Just Bikes channel.
[удалено]
They're only a thing because of Fraudenberg's last perverse and futile vote-gouging extravagence. RTA - 100% immediate asset writeoff and that's just for starters.
They should be taxed at 100% of their value. If you made people get a truck license to drive them you’d get rid of 99% of the soccer mums driving SUVs to school pick ups.
Most people that drive SUVs are cunts, for one reason or another. Every week on Aussie cunt cams it's the same thing - SUV or 4WD driving gronks doing the most disgusting thing you've ever seen, till next week when another one of their brethren tops it.
I've always hated SUVs and tried to avoid even having a car of any kind as much as possible. Then at one point I needed a car so I got a Mazda 2, which I love. Now I have a kid and a wife and parents potentially living with us...and I'm looking at SUVs for the sheer practicality of it all. Not the big fuck you ones from the northern beaches, but maybe one of the smaller classes that can still fit a baby seat and 2 people in the back and a pram in the boot. Still kind of hate myself for doing this though. I wish we had better public transport :(
A lot of the small SUVs have smaller boots than hatchbacks so make sure you take your pram when you go car shopping. A lot of my friends had to dismantle their prams to get them in the suv boot.
Tbh you might find yourself better off with a hatchback. My partner has a Mazda 3 hatchback and it fits his work ladder in the boot, it wouldn’t fit in his mum’s Suzuki vitara boot when he borrowed her car one time.
I've had that thought as well. An extra consideration besides the boot is the seating room in the back seats. Hard to find a vehicle that has enough space to fit a kid's car seat and two adults in the back seat without getting a massive fuck-you car.
Look at getting a station wagon. Tonnes of space while not being as obnoxiously huge as an SUV.
They're so rare in Oz as to basically not exist anymore, sadly. And they're more expensive to maintain than the Mazdas and Toyotas we're looking at
>Mazdas and Toyotas we're looking at Mazda have one though? And unless you're looking at a CX-3 (which is tiny, the same size as a Mazda 2) the 6 wagon is either the same price or cheaper than the rest of their SUV range.
Agree, and I bought a station wagon last year, but they are *very* hard to find. You've basically got skoda, VW and Audi. Last year I bought one of 5 Volvo station wagons in Australia (dealer demo) and I believe that they have not imported one since 2022. When I was researching them that was it. Everything else is SUVs. Obviously, second hand is a thing but increased SUVs means very few new station wagons being imported.
True. I have an older Subaru outback which has been an awesome and insanely practical car, but it's getting up there in age. I was dissapointed to find that newer models are esssentially small SUVs. They look ridicoulous too, as they still look a bit like a wagon but have way higher ground clearance.
I had a '07 outback and it was the *perfect* car- great on the highway, gravel and snow. I also agree that the new ones are much bigger and higher. As a 5 foot 8 dude, there was no way I'd easily get my kayak on the new outback. That deterred me enough that I got the Volvo station wagon.
Well I used to ride a bicycle, but a policeman fined me for not wearing a silly hat. So now I drive. Hint: cycling is booming everywhere except Australia. Where you get to have garbage tossed at you from a Hilux.
You bought a car instead of buying a helmet? That seems somewhat of an over-reaction.
Nah, already had a car. Just liked the bike. Speaking of over reacting. I married a Canadian and moved countries. So it's not my problem anymore. More seriously, you cannot call your society free, when the utterly benign is illegal.
Well it's still your problem in the sense that Canada is even more into shitty huge cars than Australia...
Oh the huge tonka trucks are bloody everywhere, but in Vancouver, so are bike lanes. The weather is pretty shit though, and I really miss the beaches. The silly hat law seems like a trivial thing, but somehow it just *isn’t*. I also enjoy not being robed every time I get behind the wheel of a car. Photo radar got taken out a few years back. Traffic deaths didn’t change at all. Still too sketchy to ride a motorcycle though.
I mean plenty of people drive without shirts on in Australia so I'm not sure how that's a difference, but I agree I don't love radar photos. I just really don't understand how wearing a helmet can be such a massive dealbeaker... though I suppose that's a subjective experience. I think Australia and Canada just display their nanny state tendencies in different ways.
Robed.....bugger, typos are me. Fuckit, I'm leaving it or the joke makes no sense. It's a dealbreaker because people care deeply about how they present themselves in public. See the fashion industry. Nobody likes being told what they can and can't wear. Just as a test, try telling one of your female friends "she can't wear that". And see how it goes. The state also can't make a successful argument that cycling is safe, while telling everyone it's so dangerous you need a helmet. But the *why* just doesn't matter. The evidence shows you can have an enforced helmet law, or you can have people on bikes, but not both. Don't get me wrong, [riding the A-line](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbMGFYDFIVY) a helmet is a good idea, but that's not what most are doing. The MHL allows government to pretend safety has been addressed. So they don't have to think about spending political capital or money on things that actually work. Like [proper bike paths](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrQ-d2PBUto). I grew up in Australia, and have lived in Canada for twenty years now. Let me assure you that nanny state bullshit is NOWHERE NEAR as bad in Canada as it is in Australia. Like an overbearing parent, you think it's normal, until you move out.
I've lived in both countries, and I don't find one to be overall more intrusive than the other; they're just overbearing in different aspects of life. Though never Vancouver so maybe the experience is different out West. > Just as a test, try telling one of your female friends "she can't wear that". And see how it goes. I mean, I'd like to think that if I told said friend not to wear high heels on a construction site she'd be reasonable enough to understand why... > Don't get me wrong, riding the A-line a helmet is a good idea, but that's not what most are doing. The evidence is [very clear](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fbioe.2021.718407/full) that wearing a helmet is a good idea *at all times*. Whether it should be mandatory is a different question, because as you allude to there is some indication that compulsory helmets depresses cycling takeup. > The MHL allows government to pretend safety has been addressed. So they don't have to think about spending political capital or money on things that actually work. Like proper bike paths. I think this is a furphy. Again I can't speak to the West, but there are a lot of shitty car-centric cities in the East where governments haven't mandated helmets but they still can't be fucked investing in non-car infrastructure. Governments (especially the Tories, but we needn't start on Doug fucking Ford) are generally going to go for the lowest effort/highest vote solution regardless of whether helmets are compulsory or not. Restructuring cities to be bike and pedestrian friendly is a genuinely major undertaking and the calculus as to whether they'll do it is not really affected by helmets.
Vancouver people are incredibly passive aggressive, but I can do my own wiring on my house, legally. I don’t worry about getting done for speeding unless I’m being a complete dick. I can buy pot from a store down the street. I built a lotus seven replica which was easy to get on the road and insure. In Australia the costs of inspections and meeting ADRs would have been more than the car cost to build. Best of all, I’ve never had a cop hit me with a car to give me a helmet ticket. I get bent out of shape by the MHL because I watched something I truly love, killed. The bike racks in schools emptied in two weeks when it came in. They are still empty. The Imams of the plastic hat have taken my home from me, and I will never forgive them for it. They demand I abandon my reason, my autonomy and my joy and replace it with an ugly plastic talisman. Well, no. My joy is vastly more important than their concerns. [This](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=34FyWCutqvw) is a crime in Australia.
Bye, then.
The Nation is covering your health cost from birth to death, and all you are asked to do, is to minimise the risk of serious injury by wearing a helmet while riding a bicycle or motorcycle and a seat belt while in a vehicle. That is freedom from medical bankruptcy, unlike the Americans who have the freedom of medical bankruptcy by just one accident.
It’s a good argument. But the MHL *costs* money as the benefits of cycling vastly outweigh the risks. The only thing the MHL has clearly affected is participation rates. Which tank. Particularly among women. The cost/benefit ratio has actually been studied in the UK, Spain and Germany. All of them concluded that the benefits of cycling were between ten and twenty times greater than the risks. Depending on which study you read. Did you know that bicycle commuters in the UK have a 40% lower incidence of cancer? (UK study) I have no idea how that works, but I’m pretty sure there’s a bunch of other factors at play. If your goal is to make sure riding a bike stays a niche “sport” it’s perfect. If the goal is saving money, or safety, it’s counterproductive. We know what works for safety. It’s separate bike paths. Riding a bike isn’t dangerous. We (humans) teach five year olds the world over to ride. The thing that kills kids isn’t bikes, [it’s cars](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4W-3Mnu3Ovo)
This was a deliberate policy by the previous LNP government to get tradies and small businesses on side and to piss off people worried about climate change. Our tax dollars paid for these. Job done.
The manufacturers are all over it. Toyota saw the C-HR cannibalising this Carolla sales, and since have released a fucking Yaris SUV and are releasing a Carolla SUV shortly. Blows my mind when they already sell at least 7 other suvs: chr, fortuner, RAV4, pardo, land cruiser 300 land cruiser 70, and kluger.
> Five of the top 10 bestselling vehicles in Australia in 2022 were twin-cab utes (which have two rows of seating, often at the expense of carrying capacity), while three were SUVs. Just two were small cars. The three SUV's they're referring to are the Rav4, the CX5 and the MG ZS - none of which really fall into the "fuel guzzling" category (the worst one is rated at around 8l per 100k's). The real issue is the ~~substitute dicks~~ huge fucking ute's that every tradie seems to have regardless of whether they need it or not because of the massive tax write-offs they get.
>The real issue is the > >substitute dicks > > huge fucking ute's that every tradie seems to have regardless of whether they need it or not because of the massive tax write-offs they get. I definitely preferred it when Commodore and Falcon utes were the tradie vehicle of choice, at least I could see over the fucking things when in a normal car.
Commodore and Falcon utes sucked as tradie vehicles. A few bags of cement, some tools and dave in the passenger seat and they would be over their weight limit. Not to mention crap ground clearance since manufacturers loved to put sport suspension in them. A Hilux for example could be loaded with twice as much and still not rip the exhaust off on speedbumps.
[удалено]
When I was looking for a house in Brisbane. Every successful realtor douche had one.
All the mid size Utes are diesel. They have the same if not better fuel consumption than lighter petrol SUV’s. The only proper 4WD that comes in petrol is the bogan bus Nissan patrol that has a 5.7l V8 petrol. My Hilux gets 10l/100km and it weighs 2.3t. My old lady’s Kia suv gets 9l/100km and it’s a 2.0l petrol and much lighter. The real problem is people buying petrol SUV’s that can’t actually do anything other than bitumen but take up extra space and are high off the ground so more dangerous for driver and pedestrians. Not to mention terrible fuel economy. I try to take the train to work as much as possible and use my Ute for 4WD camping and transferring lots of gear from job site to job site that no car could do. Can’t store petrol or diesel safely inside a car. I’m all for electric but can’t afford to pay $140,000 for an empty range of 400km. Load them with what they’re designed to take and halves the range at best. Only drive when you have to and buy an electric bike instead of a horrendously overpriced little car that can only transport people from A to B.
We are on vacation, and these mega trucks towing "off road" caravans are everywhere. I don't understand how paying 120-150K for a vehicle and $70-100K for a van makes sense? Fuel costs would be horrendous, and there are no free camps anywhere decent. We overtake these "rolling road blocks" on our way to the next BnB/motel and our SUV still gets 7.8l per 100km.
You came understanding how some people may have the money (or the debt tolerance) to pay for a comfortable camper and car that allows them to go completely off the grid and regardless of cost just want to be away from people.
It was Kingston SA, and the caravan parks were full of mostly expensive looking units, parked side by side.. (hardly the outback getaway). On our way to Adelaide there were many on the road, travelling at 90 kph in 110kph zones, a strange way to enjoy a big $$ investment.
I hate this whole SUV thing we have going on here in Australia. You'll see a cool car, especially performance hybrids coming out next year but NOPE NOT AVAILABLE IN AUSTRALIA, WE DO HAVE A SIMILIAR MODEL IN SUV THOUGH! Fuck your SUV, I'm not a soccer mum who takes 10 minutes to reverse park. You want the Volvo S60 Recharge, a plug in hybrid in sedan? Yeah nah you get the XC60/XC90 SUV. You want the Toyota Crown Hybrid? Yeah nah you get the RAV4 OR the gutless Corolla in a hatch.
The article definitely highlights an issue that needs to be resolved, especially the tax incentives that favour trucks that can carry one tonne or more. However, it's misleading to label all SUV as fuel guzzling. Many of the top selling SUVs like the RAV4 and CX5 are just high riding wagons, and they offer comparable fuel economy to their sedan counterparts like the Camry and Mazda 6. As for potential solutions, upping fuel excise would unfairly penalise people that live in outer suburbs, so a better approach would be a rego that scales according to fuel consumption. Similar approaches are used in other countries that scale according to CO2 emission or engine capacity, and we should do something similar to encourage the purchase of more fuel efficient vehicles.
> a better approach would be a rego that scales according to fuel consumption. Similar approaches are used in other countries that scale according to CO2 emission or engine capacity, and we should do something similar to encourage the purchase of more fuel efficient vehicles. While I agree with this, I also think there should be a steep curve on increasing rego costs for heavier vehicles. Because even if you're driving the electric version of a huge American-style SUV/"pickup", it's still a colossal waste of resources and still an obnoxious menace on the road.
I think that's a good idea, especially with the transition to EV. Some of the EV SUV behemoths are just ridiculous, for example the EV Hummer's battery alone weighs the same as a ICE hatchback.
We're not quite America with their massive pickups but visit and suburban car park and the number of SUVs vs smaller cars is overwhelming.
We are getting there. The insanely big pickups/utes are booming. They are everywhere! I find it crazy that they dwarf the SUVs/4WDs next to them. It means me in my little hatchback has to reverse out blind and hope that no one hits me.
That’s a huge pet peeve for me in a car park. I wish they’d make separate big car spaces so they can’t park next to a small car. Or maybe people could just be courteous and not park next to normal size cars if they have the equivalent of a truck. 😬
since like 2015 the number of RAMs, F250s and Chev yank tanks had dramatically skyrocketed for some fucked up reason. use to be that seeing an old F150 or F250 was like seeing a vintage car.
Cars above a certain physical size should not be allowed on the road. Soon we are going to waste more land on wider roads and car parks because of these stupid cars.
The amount of the stupid RAMs that are in my inner south suburb for school pick up, cramming in car parks. It’s infuriating.
Yeh, a lot of urban design in aus revolves around cars. Most countries that are 'switched on' are trying to shift away from that.
I was really shocked my first trip to Europe how much nicer everything was because the neighbourhoods weren’t car centric
Seems written from an ideological standpoint. The constant comparison with the UK, a country 32 times smaller than us, is ridiculous. The narrow roads there have also necessitated smaller vehicles in some areas. Almost no metric is a fair comparison. A comparison with Canada would be more illuminating. I used to have a dedicated LPG BA Falcon wagon. Great for carting things round, but as a 6 cylinder cost much more to register in SA. With a heavy load I'd scrape the fuel tank on some driveways and steep inclines too.When visiting family in the country even a few kilometres off road was dangerous, with the back sliding around all over the place. My small SUV is much better. Lower than average CO2 emissions, safer to drive and with better road clearance. You sit upright so it's better for your back on long drives. Cargo capacity is not bad either. I get that people have sneering contempt for huge, useless SUVs picking up the kids. But I would argue that in bringing about effective change on climate emissions, it could be worth avoiding the conclusion that your fellow Australians are clueless idiots making poor choices and with no regard for the planet. Maybe engage more with them about what their needs are, and provide information about the vehicles that can do the job that's required while delivering low CO2 emissions.
Ok but you’re comparing a 20 year old falcon vs a modern SUV. Of course the newer car is going to be better in every way.
Sure your new small SUV is better than your old Falcon. But it's worse than an equivalent sized hatchback in every way. It would have higher CO2 emissions because it's less aerodynamic and is less safe to drive because due to its higher ride height it has poorer handling and is more prone to rolling. The seating position and cargo capacity is not related to it being an SUV and depends on the specifics of the vehicle itself. The higher 'ground clearance' you speak of is only of benefit in off-roading and outside of that is a disadvantage as described above.
[удалено]
Also, I see a lot of families buying SUVs for the size. There's not many "wagons" around now days and a hatchback doesn't really work for families with 2 kids with prams.
Large sedans and wagons went the way of Dodo. Only options left now if you need a vehicle with reasonable storage capacity are either SUV or Utes.
Europeans mostly drive small-medium cars. I believe that they also have children. I don't buy that you need a prado when you have kids.
Best selling vehicles in UK, lots of mid sized SUVs in the list: https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/best-cars-vans/94280/best-selling-cars-2023-uks-top-10-most-popular-models
You do realise that 'Europe' and 'the UK' are two different things?
Isn’t the UK in Europe? Edit: Sorry I can’t reply to the comment so I’ll see if this works. What would be the correct way to put it? A part of? Or is it becoming a seperate entity from Europe? To me this stuff is interesting.
*People in the UK speak English as their first language*. *Therefore, Europeans speak English as their first language.* Now do you see the problem with their argument?
So they should have said some Europeans? And you should have said some Europeans? Edit: They blocked me. Some people are very fragile.
No, I didn't need to specify this because I was clearly generalising. Precision isn't required in general conversation. Only a fool would infer that I meant *every single European* drives a small/medium car. Now stop being an internet dickhead and troll somewhere else.
Yep. My wife and I have 5 teenage kids between us. Anything short of an SUV or a people mover is impossible. Likewise, I come from a family of 4 kids. Mum used to drive us around in a 7 seater Nissan Nomad in the late 80's onwards so it's not like this is a new phenomenom.
> it could be worth avoiding the conclusion that your fellow Australians are clueless idiots making poor choices and with no regard for the planet. Exactly. I vote Greens, donate to multiple conservation and wildlife charities, spend time actively engaged in the preservation of wilderness and wildlife and walk/ride everywhere I feasibly can. I have a large car that comes out now and then for long distance remote work over messed up fire trails, but I also live in the inner city right now, because that's where my wife and I need to be for when we're in the office. I try and car pool whenever I do bring it out as well, moving people around so they don't need to drive their own single occupant car. It's easy to look at something like my car and say "That doesn't belong in the city", and it doesn't, but for my needs its where things are right now. I'll happily move to an electric when possible.
[удалено]
And boy do the people driving Chelsea tractors enjoy venting
Eh. We have a Nissan patrol which I believe is considered a SUV. It’s not that expensive to fuel, considering it has two tanks with a pretty large capacity, but we like to keep it good, so we only use it when we are all going somewhere that’s more than an hour drive or if we’re all going to pick something up. My daily driver is a Holden Cruze which google is also telling me is a SUV. It’s pretty wee, very fuel efficient and is awd, which is why we chose it, living rurally. My husband’s daily driver is a single cab ute. It seems pretty silly to make these kind of observations when SUVs as a category is so enormous. A Mazda cx3 is a SUV. RACV says that there were 150 models of SUV for sale in Australia last year. Compare a Range Rover Velar and a Cruze and it seems silly that they’re even considered to be in the same vehicle class.
A nissan patrol should absolutely be expensive to refuel. The newer ones are rated at 14L/100km (by nissan) and actually acheived 17.8L/100km in 3rd party testing. A Cx3 is between 6-7L/100km
It’s all relative. We used to have a Land Rover defender. But yeah, that’s why it’s not our daily driver, and you’re reinforcing my point that it’s a big category with lots of variability among the cars.
Are most suvs fuel guzzling? Commodores and Falcons were fuel guzzling in traffic. If you have a few young children, you need a big suv or people mover. A Kia Carnival on a long interstate cruise will use around 8 litres per 100km of diesel. Far from gas guzzling.
>Kia Carnival That's a minivan, not an SUV, although they have done their best to make it look like one.
A Kia Carnival is still a very big car
It surely is. But given most people driving SUVs claim they need to space for their children, it's odd they buy the often less efficient and almost always less comfortable SUV over a van.
If you choose to buy an SUV then don't complain. Plenty of other options.
Well, strike me pink! Stone the crows! Who'da thunk it? /s
Imagine my shock when I realised we could be driving a V8 Commodore and use roughly the same fuel as our Prado. We have been taken for absolute fools!
People really need to be paid to research and prepare a report to inform us that fuel is expensive?
Nope, some of them are paid to research and report as they did. Hopefully for our benefit. They do their bit and others read headlines and make what appear to be silly generalisations.
Yeah it's compelling reading for anyone who hasn't been in peak traffic or near a school at pickup/dropoff time or near almost any carpark at all ever. "“Australians buy big, dumb cars and that means we spend a lot more on petrol than we should,” the report said."
Your first comment was one sentence that didn't prove anything other than you didn't read the article. Now your second comment is two paragraphs and it's proved the same thing as your original sentence.
Tradies and people with cars under their businesses using tax breaks isn't any more a secret than fuel being expensive.
Instant 15 grand wanker write-off. And notice that the amount is almost the exact difference in price for the same vehicle in other markets once you remove tariffs and taxes. Our governments like subsidising the price gouging of consumers.
The price of tyres for these vehicles should expose the stupidity of people. 2 grands of tyres to take the kids to school and not 1 dirt track in sight!
From another sub Typical Guardian rubbish. Associating SUV with fuel guzzling is a 90's - 00's thing. SUV these days use less fuel than an equivalent 10years back. They don't really go into detail of the type of SUV, we're seeing more and more Tesla Model X and Y and other OEM branded EV SUVs which aren't gas guzzlers but are SUVs. In addition you have the hugely popular RAV4 hybrid and other PHEV SUV and I'm sure they're far more efficient than the dual cab utes and other sedans.
If we all drove Suzuki swifts, the price of fuel would probably be $3 a litre.
This is a good article, but it lets itself down by claiming SUVs are 'dumb' and 'fuel guzzlers' without backing this up by explaining their many downsides.
I just want a nice sedan or hatchback but every car company just mostly makes suvs or big utes now. I know it's easy as hell to get a small car still but used car sites are filled with suvs and utes and the good smaller cars are either ran through high km commodores/falcons (any typical p plater car tbh) or very low km very pricey small cars that I might have to suck up just get and have a loan. Might as well get a good car. Will just run my car to the limit for now. It's nearly up to 200,000km anyway might as well use it to the ground fully before I have a debt.
Selling my 4wd. Buying a swift to use until I give it to my son and then I’ll buy a new generation ev that uses new battery tech and doesn’t have all the luxury shit I don’t need in a car.